• Spacehooks@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    No one calls a lion hunting violence. it’s the circle of life. If the argument is it’s violence because it’s unnecessary well we need to bring back the wolves and solve world hunger before ill be on your side of that argument. I remember the scene in the Orville where the guy felt eating animals akin to murder. Yeah in that kind of universe i can support it but we are not there yet.

    Anyone hunting for sport alone should do so with a blade, its only more sportsman. It’s not like the deer has a projectile weapon.

    • iiGxC@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      A lion hunting is violence. The circle of life is violent. I agree hunting isn’t the top priority of problems to solve, but people should at least be able to call it what it is and recognize it’s not a good thing

      • Spacehooks@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        I like to consider plant eating an act of violence. I Just ripped and tear into those yummy plant heads that were just living thier best life. If we go with this definition, then violence is a part of life and we just accept it as a necessity. It also means it is our moral duty to ensure the animals we eat are not wasted, not suffer unnecessarily, and appreciate the life that was taken so we can do more with our own. It’s only bad if it serves no purpose and is wasteful.

        • iiGxC@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          In some sense it is violence, but in another sense violence against a baby doll is fine while violence against a live baby is not. One of the key differences is the baby is sentient, the doll is not. The doll can not experience the violence, so it’s morally irrelevant. The baby can experience the violence, so it is morally unacceptable. To the best of my knowledge plants can’t feel pain, so violence to them is morally irrelevant.

          But I still accept that harm is unavoidable (at least in our time), but our response should be to minimize harm, not throw up our hands and give up and perpetuate the injustice

          • Spacehooks@reddthat.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            we agree violence should be minimized but I think it’s a hard sell to call the natural order injustice. Injustice for me is unnecessary harm. Justice can cause harm but only when necessary. Predators have to eat. Wiping them out is injustice and forcing unnatural foods alternatives is probably violating thier freedoms and damaging the ecosystem which I would also consider injustice.

            • iiGxC@slrpnk.net
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              10 months ago

              why wouldn’t the natural order be unjust? Survival of the fittest doesn’t give two shits about justice, that’s not samething that gets selected for at all except in social species, and even then usually it’s only really selected for within the species

                • iiGxC@slrpnk.net
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  10 months ago

                  Well that’s a massive question that we certainly won’t see answered in our lifetime - we haven’t even figured out justice between humans, and we still have a long ways to go on just that front. I have some ideas on what a more just world might look like, but some are not feasible with the current state of the world. But I think a good place to start is with the original position/veil of ignorance thought experiment

                  • Spacehooks@reddthat.com
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    10 months ago

                    I get that as a individual the system is cruel but at a planet level it could not be more fair. The world has balance (human shortsidedness aside) so I see it as justified. This is one of things where I wonder if I lack imagination because only alternative I see is a tomb world. Which is out of the question so i ask myself do I simply accept what has been the cycle since the start of life on earth the only path or do I truly believe in the system. Like Stockholm syndrome. Since I hate late stage capitalism I must not agree with the system but that thought only applies within sentient beings not on the planet scale we are discussing. If I had viable alternatives would I side with you? Maybe i would. This will a be fun passive thought.